Log
Of the 36p share price, about 10p/£100m is covered by Net cash. Available cash is over £200m so they are well placed to benefit from depressed valuations. Although the IPO market is now slowly improving.
Another 10p/£100m is covered by ONT, a solid valuation based on £80m raise last week.
That leaves 16p covered by 95p of NAV?
Two years old but interesting article |
SSIT is a good example of what I expect to see here. It also has a portfolio of very early stage companies. The shares were sold all the way down to 30p only to double from there over the following months. |
Bagpuss they are self-managed. It's all in the AR on their website. Net of income from patents and running some funds it costs around 1.9% of NAV. In fairness that's not a lot of leakage given the huge discount to NAV but in cash terms it is quite high given recent exits/realisations, dividends, and probably more importantly market cap. |
Thanks Loglorry. Whats the entity/company that takes these fees? |
Not bothered by the NAV, I think they have been sensible in valuation, my beef is managent not coming out fighting. This needs to be marketed, they sit back.
No doubt very nice people and all that, well educated, but too comfortable and lacking drive on behalf of the shareholders imho. |
The trail completed in Jan.. So should have reported by now. I assume the later reporting timetable could also be to do with this. |
In a downturn liquidity and low margin (borrowed money to invest) matter.
Someone might be under a margin call and out over their skis or need any liquidity they can get to cover demands.
Other areas of their portfolio might be forcing sales,
Sell the illiquid under performers first whilst you can rather than when panic sets in and they become no bid. The buyback offers a buyer of last resort.
As price falls first thing some do is ditch underperformers - also increasing selling pressure.
As it falls through some market cap limits some might then be forced to sell due to their mandates or as it approaches penny stock territory. Any tracker of the index will needto trim as % of the index falls.
At least a 1 for x consolidation will help get this out of penny stock zone.
Some might pull money out to invest in their listed holdings as more pure play.
I'm of the opinion this should be a private vehicle where a VC keeps an eagle eye on it. |
Could the fall in share price be related to the delayed Leramistat read out? Big holding for IPO. |
Ok thanks. I believe that sometimes they are cancelled but clearly not here/yet. I assume that in treasury though they still reduce the denominator in NAV/ share... |
Bagpuss Ref #3068: My understanding is the shares are not cancelled but held in Treasury. Not quite the same. Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong. |
ghh, re, "Why are you interested/invested in IPO if you believe NAV this grossly over inflated?"
===============
I have always had an interest in "Tomorrow's World" type companies, and have been invested here on and off for years. There is still a long term investment in IPO held in a family account. I know quite a bit about the co, and have done well out of investing individually in the constituents. eg TRX, IUG, DNL,
I continue to hope that one day management will accept that their priorities differ from those of the shareholders. No-one can have issues with extra rewards for outperformance, but the current set up, where management benefits accrue irrespective of shareholders needs is clearly unfair to us.
I hope that the worthy ESG credentials of fairness, equability and duty of care will evetually be extended to shareholders. |
No problem, just an example. |
Oh yeah... 10.89% goes down to 10.2% Sorry, good spot!
Really poor reporting |
No, it reduced. Previous % didn't include IP2IPO % that IPO have voting rights for. Its in the small print.
Previous % in total was higher inc IP2IPO.
Another example of less than ideal reporting, now clarified. |
FYI... After the NOVO deal in Oxford Nanopore the stake held by IPO INCREASED to 96m shares or 10.2% valued at £115m or 11.3p per ONT |
bamboo2
Why are you interested/invested in IPO if you believe NAV this grossly over inflated? |
 Don't disagree on the NAV, although to-date no disposals have been below the published number, But we do have a value for ONT, and for cash, leaving the remaining assets valued by the market at about 15p, someone else can do the calc. So even if you take a massive discount you can not believe that it falls anywhere close to this level. The meeting next month will I'm sure spend a lot of time on this. I have raised it multiple times with the CEO, admittedly last time was last year, and he always said that he believes they are fully justified as were always very conservative. They did not inflate values in 2021/2022 at the PE peak. I think they should mark down across the board, but if the sales / divestments come in at or above NAV, then we are wrong and he's right! I think the biggest issue is we don't know because the marketing / showcase of what's going on has been so limited! Even now I'd struggle to name more than 5 or 6 of the 90+ investments ! The meeting is not going to be dull ! |
palisz, the problem with the buyback is the fact that the NAV is artificially inflated. It's way above the level the current market will pay for pre-profit story based firms typically found in the IPGroup p/f. The market is seeing cash draining out of the bank account in exchange for more illiquid assets, whose falling value may never be realisable. |
Do people on here really not understand buy backs??
Do they really think that buy backs are just to push up the share price?
Buy backs are accretive to earnings, they boost the NAV per share. They make your shares more valuable. Doh! For a company like IPO they are particularly value enhancing. Anyone with more than a few weeks view should realise that it is the best use of excess funds. The maths are simple.!
You could argue that Apple buying its shares on 35x eps is purely pumping the shares.
But when you are buying at a substantial discount the long term effect is 100% beneficial. Try doing a bit of research ! |
I can see we have a seller dumping at any price which no company can do anything about ,But one thing they can do is change the management style it must be obvious to them by now buy backs are not working .
Its just a waste of companies funds losing value as the share price is falling save it for investing into start ups, think there is a lack of common sense being used by management. |
Bagpuss, major shareholders, and historical changes are in post 2. It may not be fully up to date, but will give you an idea.
Major shareholdings were removed from the co website when they 'refreshed' it.
I asked Liz V Adams to reinstate it over a year ago. She said it would be added back, but nothing has happened.
In the meantime you have to find the relevant section in the most recent annual report.
FT has a tearsheet on IPO with major shareholders, but this is fairly inaccurate.
[edit, it's post 2 you want] |
On the subject of shareholders am I right to say they dont disclose their major shareholders on their website? |
Requires action bb2, that's why.
Remember my early days comments on new managent?
Presentation new CEO gave was a clear indicator. |
ghh, If there's a big seller dripping into the market why doesn't the co negotiate with them directly? I'm sure there are plenty of brokers around who would be capable of facilitating some sort of deal.
Both parties could benefit. |
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
Hot Features
Premium
